View Single Post
Old 11-19-2016, 01:55 PM   #5
TheOneTrueClockWorK
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Default Re: Thoughts on some house rules?

Quote:
The Twohanded grip makes good sense. Just be aware that it makes swing attack even more powerful compared to thrust attacks. It doesn't really make anything unbalanced, it just means your players are almost never going to make thrust attacks unless you introduce some other house rules.
Do you have any thoughts on balancing this?

Quote:
Most of these make fine sense to me. I certainly have no problem merging one-handed swords and fencing skills. Personally, I went the other way with pole-weapons--merging staff and spear and keeping unbalanced polearms separate (similar to the sword v. axe/mace distinction.)

I don't entirely agree with how you've nerfed the Main-Gauche, however. It's already a poor buy compared to simply increasing your main weapon skill.

Instead, I'd suggest getting rid of the Main Gauche skill entirely, and allowing people to buy the Parrying Dagger Perk to upgrade their knife skill. I'd seriously consider doing the same thing with fencing weapons, e.g. players buy One-Handed Sword plus a Fencing Perk in order to get the improved parries.
I wanted to group staff and polearm together because they're usually used in a similar way. For example, I do a little bit of Japanese martial arts, and I find that the naginata and bo are usually used in a very similar fashion. I imagine that would hold true for a quarterstaff and glaive or halberd.

As for the main-gauche skill, I wanted it to fit more of an arnis style of knife fighting, as I feel that would be more appropriate for those who might use a knife as a back-up or even primary.

Creating the main-gauche or fencing skills via a perk is interesting. How would this fit into a fencer who has only ever trained in that style of fighting, though? For example, if someone learns to use a smallsword, and that's all they've ever learned, they need an extra point for a perk, and can apparently switch their stance into a more military way of fighting, despite that being a very different style? Or am I misinterpreting something?

Quote:
Yeah, I like this fine. I'd make it a technique even so players can buy off the attack penalty if they want.

However, I wouldn't have it replace Defensive Grip--I'd just make it a separate option.
Would you suggest to leave defensive grip as it is then, but give an option to one or two hand, rather than require two-handing?


Quote:
Most of this seems okay--it just allows you to gain some of the benefits of defensive grip without using two-hands on your weapon (you could even replace fencing skills with One-Handed Sword held in a one-handed defensive grip). This bit doesn't make sense to me. I like the general bonus to hit with a thrust while half-swording, but not the reduction to damage, that makes no sense and isn't born out by my experience with historical fencing.

Is the "-1 to hit an armored foe" referring to targeting chinks, or do you have a house rule that assesses a penalty to hit foes in armor?
Would allows a Fencing stance with the One-Handed Sword skill not be weird? That would imply that those with military, battlefield training can use and easily understand the stances and tight footwork of a fencer.

Good point on the half-sword thrusting damage. I was iffy with that one as well. And yes, that's meant to be -1 to target chinks in the armor. I don't know why I wrote it like I did?
TheOneTrueClockWorK is offline   Reply With Quote